#3DS&Pentium
That's a good point Ana. Now I remember when you were going through
testing the Compaq's. This brings a question I always had, why is it
that magazines reviews never tell what we need to know? Everytime I
see a comparison review of a bunch of different "anything" in a
magazine, the points they bring for comparing are always "pointless".
They always compare details that don't make any sense. When comparing
CPU's why would I care how fast or how slow is the hard disk access?
Assuming you can put whatever you want, from a 10M Tandom MFM hard
disk (XT's original) to a fast gigabyte SCSI-II using a 32 bit bus
mastering controller. It's also good to point out that you never get
the system that goes to the magazine for review. That's the $20,000
version of the $2,000 system you receive via UPS…
As far as I can tell, these el'cheapo Pentiums that are poping up all
over the place are nothing else than biffed up 486's. I don't see any
problem with it if the price is right. But it does smell like the
first 386/16 that came into play back in 87. After about 6 months
there was nothing to do with those machines. The big difference was
that when they first showed up, you were expected to shell out 10g's
for a 2M unit (with an 80M RLL hard disk)!
Compaq's are all right as they are rugged machines and so forth. But
they also cost almost three times everybody else. They tend to have
too many proprietary stuff and you kind off get stuck with them
(lesson learned from big'ol blues).
The problem with being in the leading edge of all this is that you are
the first one to get your face smacked in the wall when the wave hits
the shore.